How

Do Relations Between Blacks & Whites

Shape their Receptivity toward Immigrants?
HELEN B. MARROW
Sociology, Tufts University

With:
LINDA R. TROPP
Psychology & Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst

META VAN DER LINDEN
Centre for Political Research, University of Leuven, Belgium

MICHAEL JONES-CORREA
Political Science, Cornell University

DINA G. OKAMOTO
Sociology, Indiana University

13th Annual Conference of the International Migration,

Integration and Social Cohesion in Europe (IMISCOE) network,
Prague, Czech Republic, June 30-July 2, 2016

New Demographic Context in the U.S.

What are contact
experiences between
immigrants & the U.S.born in local areas like?

How does this contact

shape the U.S.-borns
receptivity toward
immigrants, which may
in turn shape
immigrant
incorporation?
BUT: Immigrantnative contact doesnt
occur in a vacuum

How White-Black Contact Receptivity?

1. U.S. race scholarship has increasingly shaped immigrant

incorporation (assimilation) theory (Portes, Rumbaut, and Zhou)

Still mostly focused on the immigrant side

But increasing emphasis on the native side, esp. racial contexts of reception

2. Racial triangulation model (Kim 1999)

Considers how natives (usually whites) position racial minority groups &
immigrants along both (a) vertical racial & (b) horizontal citizenship axes

3. Group position model (Bobo and Hutchings 1996)

Most race scholarship, like public opinion, still focused only on whites attitudes
Some beginning to analyze blacks & other minorities reactions to outgroups

Group position model comes closest to modeling a truly multi-group context

Suggests blacks unique experiences as racially discriminated shape their opinion

But analysis still largely binary
Measures how groups feel about their own relationship to & treatment by whitedominated American society (racial alienation) attitudes toward outgroups

How White-Black Contact Receptivity?

4. (Face-to-face) contact theory

Primary transfer eects (PTEs)

Extent to which contact with a member of one primary outgroup may

generalize to all members of that same outgroup

Secondary transfer eects (STEs)

Extent to which contact with a member of one primary outgroup may

generalize to all members of a second outgroup not involved in the
original contact situation (Bowman & Grin, Brylkaa et al., Harwood et al.,
Hindriks et al., Pettigrew and Tropp, Lolliot et al., Schmid et al., Tausch et al.,
Van Laar et al.)

Theoretical consensus STEs exist

Methodological consensus Need to control for direct contact with primary
outgroup in order to isolate them

Mechanisms underlying STEs still being debated

Cognitive: Attitude generalization, deprovincialization, ideology, perceived similarity in

social status/stigma

Aective: Reduced anxiety, heightened empathy, changes in liking

Most studies examine whites (attitude holders) & nonimmigrant outgroups

(objects of attitudes)

Study of Immigrants in Atlanta & Philadelphia

(SINAP)
Field Sites:

Atlanta & Philadelphia metro areas

Historically black-white metro areas (in mid-20th century)

Rapidly diversifying due to new immigration

Groups:

U.S.-Born: Whites & Blacks

Immigrants: Mexicans & S. Asian Indians

Whites & blacks the U.S. dominant majority & subordinate racial minority groups
Mexicans & Indians the two largest immigrant groups in both metro areas, + vary along
racial, socioeconomic, religious, skin tone, citizenship, & linguistic status markers of
analytical interest

Samples:

40-minute randomized full telephone

survey of N=2,006 respondents (250 from

each group in each site), summer 2013

Composite Contact Measures

QUANTITY (COMPOSITE FREQUENCY) OF CONTACT: How often

do you interact with [outgroup]
at work?
in the neighborhood?
around town, such as at malls, grocery stores, or restaurants?

(0) Never, rarely, sometimes, or often (3)

QUALITY (COMPOSITE FRIENDLINESS) OF CONTACT: When you

interact with [outgroup]
at work
in the neighborhood
when you are around town
how does it feel?
(-2) very unfriendly very friendly (2)

Composite Contact Measures

Respondent Group

Reliability Estimate
Omega ()

Whites Contact Quantity

Contact Quality
Blacks Contact Quantity
Contact Quality

.58-.71
.50-.64

.65-.75
.51-.60

Mexicans Contact Quantity

Contact Quality

.72-.82
.72-.76

Indians Contact Quantity

Contact Quality

.74-.82
.50-.66

Who Has Contact with Whom? Frequency:

often

3
2.5

2
with whites

1.5

with blacks
with Mx immgts
with Ind immgts

1
0.5
never

0
Whites

Blacks

How Does that Contact Feel? Quality:

very
friendly

with whites

0
Whites

with blacks
Blacks

with Mx immgts
with Ind immgts

-1

very
unfriendly -2

How Does the Frequency of White-Black

Contact Shape Receptivity toward
Immigrants?

Welcome (0 to 3 scale)

2 Dependent Variables

A.
B. Desire to know (-2 to 2 scale)

Hierarchical Regression Model Built in 5 Stages

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Demographic & political controls

Composite frequency of contact with the immigrant outgroup (PTE)
Composite frequency of contact with the other native group (STE)
Controlling for composite quality of contact with the immigrant outgroup
Controlling for composite quality of contact with the other native group
(FULL MODEL)

A. Welcome
(Stage 5 Full Model Results)

+ ( = .11*, p < .05)

Whites
Whites
frequent
frequent
contact
contact with
with
BLACKS
BLACKS

+ ( = .14**, p < .01)

Welcome toward Mexican

immigrants

+ ( = .15**, p < .01)

Blacks
frequent
contact with
WHITES

Welcome toward Indian

immigrants

B. Desire to Know (i.e., for more contact)

(Stage 5 Full Model Results)

+ ( = .12*, p < .05)

Whites
Whites
frequent
frequent
contact
contact with
with
BLACKS
BLACKS

Blacks
frequent
contact with
WHITES

+ ( = .12*, p < .05)

Desire to know Mexican

immigrants

Desire to know toward

Indian immigrants

A. Welcome
(Stage 5 Full Model Results)

+ ( = .11*, p < .05)

Whites
Whites
frequent
frequent
contact
contact with
with
BLACKS
BLACKS

+ ( = .14**, p < .01)

Welcome toward Mexican

immigrants

+ ( = .15**, p < .01)

Blacks
frequent
contact with
WHITES

Welcome toward Indian

immigrants

B. Desire to Know (i.e., for more contact)

(Stage 5 Full Model Results)

+ ( = .12*, p < .05)

Whites
Whites
frequent
frequent
contact
contact with
with
BLACKS
BLACKS

Blacks
frequent
contact with
WHITES

+ ( = .12*, p < .05)

Desire to know Mexican

immigrants

Desire to know toward

Indian immigrants

Summing Up: Still Largely a PTE Contact Story,

but STEs, tooMainly for Whites

PTEs

But also STEs of contact frequency with the other U.S.-born group

Whites & blacks welcome, & blacks desire to know, is signicantly & + predicted both by
frequency & quality of contact directly with both immigrant outgroups
Whites desire to know is signicantly & + predicted by quality of contact directly with
both immigrant outgroups

None are signicantly moderated by contact quality

More consistent among U.S-born whites than blacks (need further work on mechanisms)

All are +